I did call of course. Like I said there are some players against whom I just fold on the R.

I haven't seen any player having that kind of stats yet.

If we assume villain is stealing 50% of hands on the btn and we just multiply frequencies of cbets and opening range (it is very simple and it is a generalization, but it might be helpful in many situations) we get:
50*0,65*0,45*0,25=3,56% equals 48 hands betting on the R
50*0,4*0,55*0,15=1,65% equals 22 hands.

In this situation 48 hands will be probably: TT+,AJ,JT,A2,44,22 and even if we add some bluffs (which makes more combos for betting) we still need to fold.
In the second situation 22 hands will be only JJ,TT,44,22,A2 so every eazy fold.

the only "intresting" hand was Q3s... and not much really, no real combo analisis, but an "ok" hand.

Other ones was soooooooo damns std... I dont really understand this video.
Is this beeing a calling station? just std hands dude... sorry but is the true =P

AJs is also std... and the "Q" is not the worst card in the deck, it is almost THE BEST! cause now he has lest combos of Qx...
I see until then and I just has to stop watching.
and if u just dont say how much u open on sb, and how much he defend.. is almost a flip calling or not the river (I call anyway).

yomatiyo thank you for your opinion. I see your point. You ve pointed out some things I didn't take into consideration during making this movie.
I steal on average 58% but it doesn't mean I will have this range vs this guy.
He defends 48%:35 flat + 13 3b.
Q was the card I cannot bluff. I can't bluff off 99,88 etc. I can't put T into tough decision, I can't go for a check raise credibly. All those things makes Q a bad card. But you are right. Q is good from other point of view - he in fact will have less combos of Qx and it should also stop him from bluffing because he should expect me to go for a check-call often.

1st hand was not so obvious. BTN knew what we had there...and even though betting big. Players who can change gears easily will make you suffer in that kind of spots, but you are right it was the easiest hand.

I think showing somebodys game nowadays is pointless and is overrated. I can't make a movie on the networks I play. All you can do is on the partners sites. Making this to 'show' how the coach is playing have no instructional value.

I also think showing sb's game is expensive. Watching the game of my opponents, listening to their way of thinking is priceless....for me as their opponent.

I can't agree with you these hands were standard play. Maybe you are way much better player then me (it is possible) or maybe you still play small stakes and think you know everything (it is also possible). Maybe it depends on players style of playing and the way of thinking and I really think there were some interresting hands and moments.

I don't think calling 3 barrels makes you a calling station. You ran vs air when you had QJ, AQ, Q3 and 97 (and you ran vs 65o here, so it is a terrible player and easy to have reads against him), meaning that your opponents will barrel at a super high frequency, which makes your calls standard. On Q74ccTQ AJ is a fantastic hand to bluff catch with, whhich makes calling quite easy. When you had 88 and A7, you ran against value hands, which is unfortunate, but people don't bluff 100% of the time so it's whatever. If you have established that you play vs aggressive players then clicking call is standard, but even they can have hands so we lose sometimes, it's OK.

It's basically "his bluffing frequency is high, so I call", well, I'm sorry but this type of reasoning is very standard. That's about the content of the video. I really enjoyed the format (1 hand every 7 minutes is nice), your English is really pleasant to listen to, and you must have a good mic as well, so it made it all nice to watch.

It would be more interesting to determine how are villains still bluffing, even though they know you have top pair (like you said in #7).

Hi Robmaf and welcome to our community!
It is never easy to make a first video and whilst some comments might be a bit arsh for your first one i can see where they are coming from.
To me as well those hands seemed "standard". Now they migh

Now they might not be but maybe you didnt go into enough details to show us how those calls were difficult ones?
Maybe a good addition would be to explain us what would be you overall calling range in those spots and what you expect villain's range to be.
Anyways it is great to have you here and take those comments the right way to make your next videos better :)

Ok, I haven't thought about this. Ok I will see what I can do about it (addition with explanations) and probably will make it shortly.

I would like to point something out. A friend of mine who is a HU player told me those calls were standard for him as well, but when I asked 6max players most of them said something opposite. So the question is: do you play HU<yomatiyo,dublimax>? Or did I really misjudge calling in certain spots in your opinion?

Anyway I am really glad getting these suggestions and feedback. It is very constructive. Thank you for that.

I am 95% 6 max player and ii certainly don't feel skilled enough to tell you if you misplayed those hands or not. It also depends on so many things that we don't know such as how villain sees you, villains's value range,dynamics at those stakes etc....
I would say the main thing that will make people think that your calls were standard ones is because you were describing villains as agressive enough and giving them a (very) wide bluffing range so then it becomes an "easy" call.
As you suggested, giving us a bit more explanations and being a bit more specific on ranges would certainly help us understand the dynamics at those stakes and the thinking behind your plays.
Once again it is great to have a player like yourself making videos for us and i'm looking forward to the next ones.

What are your overall stats? Like vpip/pfr/3b/4b, cbet and fold vs cbet and wtsd, just to give us an idea, how you play and then it gets more interesting to think what your opponents are thinking in these hands.

I think you chose a good concept video as your first, but didn't give us enough detail on your opponents (and yourself!). Maybe you could include at least some stats on your villains next time so us viewers would have at least some reads besides "he's really aggro" to go by.

@pokerstrategy: it's about time to see some actual hs-content, thanks!

Q on the R decreases combos of valuerange (strong enough to make a ch/r), but increases thin valuebet combos (like Tx increase in value,99,88 etc). It also decreases combos of bluffs in my opponents range. Why? Because it will be way easier for me to go for a ch/c. - IT IS TRUE AT SOME LEVEL of thinking, but at some point bluffing in that kind of spots make your opponents 2nd guessing - because they will 'know' you shouldn't bluff so much.
I think if I go for a ch/r there any Tx is calling and 99 is calling as well if sb is betting it. So the calling range is widening. Why? Because it is way more difficult to represent anything strong credibly.

Sure, I ve made videos before with stats but I ve had way too much numbers on the screen. So I like the suggestion about putting simple HUD.

I don't understand last hand.... :( You told the cold caller BU can have anything and very wide range, but seriosuly you cbet to 3way with a fish in the party, this makes your range tighter and not wider (imho)...
Because of that and also because the fish will overcall very frequently (if BU is call in position) i realldy dont think he can float us with very light range. If it is the cause, then i think we should turn our lowest value hands from our betting range and bet vs the reg for bluff and for value/merge against a fish (bet vs
draws, A highs)...

To summorize i think the reg will be tighter and stronger range and also not capped due to the fish in the party...(last hand)

I see your point. Normally when it is like you re saying BU will start calling megawide range pre and attack every single time I don't bet. So he will have a license to flat pre any2 and license to bet any2 when I check. He also will have super easy game vs me. So I WILL BET THERE WIDE using the knowledge I am betting only good hands. It should work quite often. I also can do it wide vs fish because I have position and skill advantage.
This is the way to earn money in this spot, exploiting his often fold because of percieved strenght of my range. The way he should respond is call wider (representing showdown value + playing position). He can call wider because many times I will just check fold T. So most likely he will call: 22+, any gs, any Ax, any backdoordraws. He can do it because he can use certain concepts to make my life hell in this spot.
I don't know this guy so much so all those things are assumptions. He does or doesn't do some moves, but I need to take it into consideration.

#26 I agree: ch/r sets is a good option there. As I ve said - 'I cannot go for a check/raise credibly' - it would be a great situation to do it for value not as a bluff. The bluff is good if opponent expects I am playing monsters this way. So at the end it depends on the level we both play. Without enough knowledge about my opponent I put him on 'not expecting to do it with a strong hand', but I can me wrong.

#27 There were suggestions about making explanation video. So pls let me do it. I will do my best.